30 sep

I would say out of the first week at the United Nations, the dangerous things have emerged are basically two. One is the call by Prince Thani of Qatar, seconded to some extent by Tunisia, to have an Arab League invasion of Syria. This would be an act of absolute folly.
The other one is the proposal of France to have some kind of humanitarian corridor or save-zone which would mean, again, invading Syria and trying to take over sovereign territory of Syria.
Both of these are very, very dangerous. The only comfort we have is they don’t seem to be going anywhere at the present time. But with the mental instability of the Western elites, that could change at any moment.

The Secretary General of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), Nikolay Bordyuzha, and the UN Deputy Secretary General in charge of Peacekeeping Operations, Hervé Ladsous, signed a Memorandum of Understanding on 28 September 2012 in New York.
The document sets out the conditions for the deployment of CSTO troops within the framework of UN peacekeeping operations.
The CSTO has carried out studies on the possible deployment of peacekeeping troops in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Pridnestrovie and in Syria.
So far, NATO has been the only military pact capable of deploying peacekeepers under a UN umbrella. From now on, it will be possible to also count on the ”blue chapkas” (Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Russia).

The BND admitted that only 5% of armed terrorists in Syria are really Syrians, 95% of them are from abroad.
According to the newspaper “Die Welt”, the BND has published in an official and detailed account of the nationalities of the rebels in Syria and their locations in the country.
Most of the rebels come from African countries. It is likely to be members of al Qaeda.
According to the report, the number of rebels in Syria estimated at 14,800.

”If ending the violence was in the hands of the Syrian government, then I assure you we would have ended it yesterday,” Moallem said. ”Unfortunately, it is not a Syrian government decision. It is in fact Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, who are arming, hosting, and financing these armed groups. So the decision is there.”

The plan called for funding of a “Free Syria Committee”, and the arming of “political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities” within Syria. The CIA and MI6 would instigate internal uprisings, for instance by the Druze in the south, help to free political prisoners held in the Mezze prison, and stir up the Muslim Brotherhood in Damascus.
The planners envisaged replacing the Ba’ath/Communist regime with one that was firmly anti-Soviet, but they conceded that this would not be popular and “would probably need to rely first upon repressive measures and arbitrary exercise of power”.
…
The ongoing US-NATO aggression directed against Syria has been planned for several years.
An invasion of Syria was contemplated in the immediate wake of the 2003 Iraq invasion by US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
“Regime change” in Damascus was again put forth by the Bush adminstration in the immediate wake of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The assassination was casually blamed, without evidence, on Damascus.
President George W. Bush “denounced Syria and its ally, Iran, as ‘outlaw regimes… Syria and Iran deserve no patience from the victims of terror,’” The British media confirmed in October 2005 that Washington was “looking for a pro-western replacement for Mr Assad.”